As Seen in Vanity Fair's August 2006 Issue!
As Seen in US News & World Report's September 11 Fifth Anniversary Issue!
As Seen in Time Magazine's September 11, 2006 Issue!
As Seen in Phoenix New Times' August 9, 2007 Issue!

Saturday, March 16, 2013

Truthers Blow Lid Off Of New World Order

A pair of prominent Truthers have finally accomplished their dream, uncovering some of those secret operatives behind the American Empire. After years of spinning their wheels and making vague accusations against people like Dick Cheney (like that one was hard to call) they have now exposed the secret life of... Ben Affleck.

Argo, Ben Affleck's blockbuster film and this year's Academy Award-winner for Best Picture, is nothing more than a propaganda piece developed to incite hatred of Iran.
At least that's what some conspiracy theorists have posited. And as BuzzFeed first reported, they believe that Affleck, in addition to his day job in Hollywood, may also be a secret government operative.
Writing for Iranian state news agency PressTV on Wednesday, Kevin Barrett presented a dubious case to support that claim. Citing a "leading [expert] on ultra-secretive covert operations," but offering no hard evidence, Barrett ripped the film and wondered if Affleck should be "brought to justice" for his role in producing it.
"If the makers of Argo are deposed under oath, they may be forced to reveal that their film — like the fictitious film-within-the-film — is a covert operation disguised as a movie," he wrote.
Barrett's expert is Barbara Honegger, a former Bush and Reagan staffer with a reputation for promoting conspiracies based on scant evidence.
In her book October Surprise, she claims that officials close to Reagan colluded with Iran to prolong the infamous hostage crisis until after the 1980 election, in a deliberate attempt to weaken incumbent Jimmy Carter.

So James, I'll suppose it's your unwillingness to indulge the "no true debunker" fallacy that causes you to tolerate the absurdities put forth by MGF and UtterFail and Ian, like Ian's repeated claims that there are no widows.

So would you consider the confabulator MGF and the liars GutterBall and Ian to be good debunkers or what?

MGF, thanks for demonstrating that you can not show that Kevin Barrett has any standing in the truth movement. From appearing on Fox News he has moved now to Press TV by way of Russia Today. In his 2009 interview with RT he lied four times in the first four minutes.

Thanks for admitting that you and GutterBall and Ian don't debunk anything. Thanks for your irrational claim that there is no “plausible evidence that 9/11 didn't happen the way it happened.”I don't think anyone is claiming that there is any such evidence.

The burden of proof is only to show that the official reports are inadequate—and they are inadequate on the face. The 9/11 Commission failed to answer 273 of the widows' questions. NIST gave us only half a report, and by cutting off their analysis at the moment of collapse initiation, they left out the ten essential mysteries of the towers' demise.

It appears you are not aware of the many videos of professional engineers at the ae911truth youtube channel providing their professional concerns about the issues.

I am not a liar, a bigot or a holocaust denier. No high-profile 9/11 Truther has ever committed murder. You are a liar, MGF.

Len, please name the holocaust deniers in the movement and detail the collaborations of reasonable truthers with them. Let's short-cut this. Do you have any evidence that Eric Williams is a current member of the truth movement?

What a shock to see Brian posting hysterical spam in a post about Kevin Barrett. Brian, of course, is humiliated by the fact that Kevin Barrett is a serious scholar being quoted in the news, while Brian is a failed janitor who gets humiliated by my mocking his hideous haircut and his homosexual obsession with Willie Rodriguez.

Brian, you were banned from the truth movement for being a liar and a sex predator. Kevin Barrett was not banned. Thus, he has standing in the movement, and you do not.

You can squeal all you want about that, but it doesn't change the fact that you've failed again. Given that you're an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents, you should be pretty used to failure by now.

Ian, your belief that Dr. Barrett is a serious scholar is not supported by the evidence. He lied four times in four minutes on Russia Today. His books "Truth Jihad" and "Questioning the War on Terror" are silly. He claims he has lost an academic career because of his opinions about 9/11, but his demonstrated incompetence makes it easy to see why he had no academic career.

Ian, your persistent libeling of me is quite puzzling. Why bother?

I guess I've finally come to understand your persistent assertion that the widows have no questions. Clearly you make this claim as a legal defense, so you can claim that ALL of your lies are just comedy and therefore not libel.

Ian, your belief that Dr. Barrett is a serious scholar is not supported by the evidence. He lied four times in four minutes on Russia Today. His books "Truth Jihad" and "Questioning the War on Terror" are silly. He claims he has lost an academic career because of his opinions about 9/11, but his demonstrated incompetence makes it easy to see why he had no academic career.

Nobody cares.

Ian, your persistent libeling of me is quite puzzling. Why bother?

Truth is not libel, Brian. Also, I enjoy humiliating you.

I guess I've finally come to understand your persistent assertion that the widows have no questions. Clearly you make this claim as a legal defense, so you can claim that ALL of your lies are just comedy and therefore not libel.

Also, Brian, your list of essential mysteries is incorrect. The correct essential mysteries are the mushroom cloud, the vaporized steel, the radiation in the dust, the burnt baboon fur found in the wreckage, and the streaks of light seen as the towers collapsed.

Ian, truth is not libel--correct. Thus when I point out that your buddy Dr. Kevin Barrett is a liar, a bigot, and an advocate of violence, I am not libeling him because what I say is true. And when I point out that William Rodriguez is a lying con artist who stole his phony hero story from a true hero, Pablo Ortiz, I am not libeling Willie, because what I say is true.

You are libeling me because you are lying. Also, you've presented no evidence of baboon fur in the dust. You seem to think the death of 3000 people in the towers is a matter for comedy.

Ian, truth is not libel--correct. Thus when I point out that your buddy Dr. Kevin Barrett is a liar, a bigot, and an advocate of violence, I am not libeling him because what I say is true. And when I point out that William Rodriguez is a lying con artist who stole his phony hero story from a true hero, Pablo Ortiz, I am not libeling Willie, because what I say is true.

Nobody cares.

You are libeling me because you are lying.

False.

Also, you've presented no evidence of baboon fur in the dust.

False.

You seem to think the death of 3000 people in the towers is a matter for comedy.

I don't. I think you're a matter for comedy, since you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor who believes in magic thermite elves.

Once again Brian's mental illness is on full display. First he writes:

"Thanks for your irrational claim that there is no “plausible evidence that 9/11 didn't happen the way it happened.”I don't think anyone is claiming that there is any such evidence."

Then proceeds to claim 9/11 didn't happen the way it did.

"The burden of proof is only to show that the official reports are inadequate—and they are inadequate on the face. The 9/11 Commission failed to answer 273 of the widows' questions. NIST gave us only half a report, and by cutting off their analysis at the moment of collapse initiation, they left out the ten essential mysteries of the towers' demise."

There is a demonstration of the lack of independent though, all of Gage's talking points are present in this statement. Brian is incapable of thinking, and therefore reasoning for himself. He is a follower. Always has been and always will be.

And Brian calls me "it", like Buffalo Bill from "Silence of the Lambs". It kind of makes sense, since both Brian and Buffalo Bill wear women's clothing, live in their parents' house, have no friends, have homosexual obsessions, etc. etc.

Let's just hope that chunky young women don't start going missing in the Bay Area.

MGF, I have never claimed that anything happened that did not happen. I leave that kind of nonsense to youse guys, who claim the widows got answers, who claim that the collapses of the buildings were thoroughly investigated.

Did it ever occur to you that Mr. Gage might use my talking points instead of the other way around?

The rake-on-rake model very well expresses an important point--which is probably exactly why it's subjected to so much ridicule.

It does express an important point: that Brian Good is mentally ill, which is probably why he's unemployed and lives with his parents, and why his avatar is of that "strutting, bragging, lying, hot sexy hunk of latin manhood", Willie Rodriguez.

Your work was done before you even started, years ago. You never had any command of the facts. You live in a fantasy world of erroneous ideologically-based assumptions compounded by your deep emotional need to feel superior to everyone else.

You never actually did any work here. All you accomplished was to discredit your belief system and make a fool of yourself.

How does the rake on rake model express the allegation that I am mentally ill? In what way does it fail to express its legitimate point?

See what I mean? You think the rake on rake "model" has a legitimate point. Thus, you're mentally ill.

I have many times provided evidence that the widows exist.

False.

Your work was done before you even started, years ago. You never had any command of the facts. You live in a fantasy world of erroneous ideologically-based assumptions compounded by your deep emotional need to feel superior to everyone else.

You never actually did any work here. All you accomplished was to discredit your belief system and make a fool of yourself.

Ian, the rake-on-rake model has a legitimate point. That is to show that far from resembling a piledriver pounding a piling (and who ever heard of a piledriver that disintegrated its piling in a single blow anyway?) the interaction between a falling top block and the lower structure would include a lot of missed hits and a lot of friction.

Thus it would more resemble a little rake hitting a big rake than a piledriver hitting a pile. If you had bothered to read the text in the link instead of just looking at the pictures, you would know this.

Thanks for yet again demonstrating your boorishness in celebrating the widows' frustration.

You were squealing hysterically above out of humiliation over the failure of the truth movement.

Ian, the rake-on-rake model has a legitimate point. That is to show that far from resembling a piledriver pounding a piling (and who ever heard of a piledriver that disintegrated its piling in a single blow anyway?) the interaction between a falling top block and the lower structure would include a lot of missed hits and a lot of friction.

Thanks for proving my point. You don't understand a thing about what happened on 9/11, which is to be expected because you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor.

Thus it would more resemble a little rake hitting a big rake than a piledriver hitting a pile. If you had bothered to read the text in the link instead of just looking at the pictures, you would know this.

Oh, we read the text. It's a hilarious demonstration of your mental illness.

Thanks for yet again demonstrating your boorishness in celebrating the widows' frustration.

Poor Brian. I've humiliated him again by demonstration that he still hasn't gotten a single question from the widows answered. Not one.

IOW, TAW, if not for me bringing some life to this place, the peedunker movement would be dead.

This is true. After all, the truth movement is dead, so nobody would be posting here if Brian weren't still, after 4 years here, posting the same spam about modified attack baboons, magic thermite elves, and invisible widows. Naturally, many of us stick around to point and laugh at him for this, as well as for things like the fact that he's unemployed and lives with his parents, or his hideous haircut, or the fact that he was banned from the truth movement.

Funny how Brian says that the 9/11 Families questions "haven't been asked" when the 9/11 Commission was founded by the 4 widows, aka Jersey Girls, who had their questions answered by the same Commission they started.

The Loose Change forum has died and been reborn a couple of times. A couple of years ago is was being dominated by CIT-heads. I guess when CIT was shown to be full of $h!t their crowd kinda lost interest and wandered off to play with their X-boxes or whatever.

The Loose Change forum has died and been reborn a couple of times. A couple of years ago is was being dominated by CIT-heads. I guess when CIT was shown to be full of $h!t their crowd kinda lost interest and wandered off to play with their X-boxes or whatever.

And when the truth movement was shown to be full of shit, the crowd kinda lost interest and wandered off to play with their X-Boxes. Except for you, of course. You're too poor to afford an X-Box. You can't even afford a normal haircut. HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!

I'm not the one going around and said that they NEVER got their questions answered when they actually got 27 of the MOST IMPORTANT questions of theirs answered by the Commission they brought into being by their own means.

The Loose Change forum has died and been reborn a couple of times.

Yeah, kind of like Dylan Avery's films that he messed up 4 times, right?

Let's remember that it's been over 4 years since Brian started spamming this board about invisible widows with "questions", and he STILL hasn't provided a shred of evidence that the widows exist, or that they have questions.

Ian, you continue to lie. I've never spammed about invisible widows, and I've proven many times that the widows exist. You've been repeating these same juvenile jokes for years, and you've driven the serious posters away from this board (remember Sackcloth and Ashes?) with your embarrassing twaddle.

"They call me all the time," said Thomas H. Kean, the commission's chairman and a former Republican governor of New Jersey. "They monitor us, they follow our progress, they've supplied us with some of the best questions we've asked. I doubt very much if we would be in existence without them."

Here's 1 question that the Jersey Girls always asked but got no answer to and Brian fails to show:

But they had a burning question. "We simply wanted to know why our husbands were killed," Ms. Breitweiser said, "why they went to work one day and didn't come back."

I see you're aping Ian's tactic: make an absurd claim, and then when it's shown to be absurd, say nobody cares.

It's been 12 yrs Brian and they've had their questions answered by their own commission that they've headed up. Nothing absurd about it, but then again I'm debating with a total moron who ain't got nothing to prove other than he skipped taking his meds.

There's nothing dead about the horse. The fact remains that the widows' 300 questions only got 27 answers--and that fact will go through history as a fact until the questions are answered.

The fact is who cares but you and they had their questions answered and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Speaking of which you've never helped them get their "300 questions" answered. Instead you're sitting there typing away on your computer arguing with us on this blog and you call us everything under the sun but you won't lift a finger to do anything?

Until you actually help the widows with their questions Brian you have failed proving that their questions were never answered. Despite that they did have 27 questions answered, they still got their questions answered reguardless of how much you pursuade that they didn't get them answered.

What's the matter Brian, hiding from the fact that you just got your ass handed to you again?

You use the widows as an excuse to hide the fact that you have nothing to offer. You're just like the terrorist, you use the widows as human shields from your failures.

I wonder what it would be like for you to come face to face with all the widows you shamelessly talk about. I wonder if you'd be scared or run away or act completely different in front of them. One things for sure, you would be a coward in front of them.

27 questions were answered. The 273 were not. You're as silly as Ian, claiming that answering 9% of the questions is "answering the questions". You might as well claim that if 4.5% of the voters chose you, that "the voters chose me". The only ass you're handing anyone is your own.

Why should I be afraid of the widows? You should be afraid of the widows. You are obstructing their quest for truth and justice.

MGF, you don't even know what the questions are. Your claims that they have already been answered and that they are groundless are a fairy tale you tell yourself to protect your complacency.